2005 WP2 Chung.Pdf (269.8Kb)

The Mario Einaudi Center for International Studies Working Paper Series The Suryong System as a Collectivist Developmental Strategy by Young Chul Chung Paper No. 02-05 October 2005 The Mario Einaudi Center for International Studies 170 Uris Hall Cornell University t. 607-255-6370 f. 607-254-5000 [email protected] www.einaudi.cornell.edu The Suryong System as a Collectivist Developmental Strategy by Young Chul Chung Abstract Many Western studies, seeing North Korea through the prism framed by the Cold War, depicts it as one or some combination of three images: a satellite of the Soviet Union, a totalitarian regime, or a feudal dynasty. This paper argues in contrast that it is best to explain North Korea’s political institution centered around Suryong as a product of the collective choice to pursue the often contradictory dual goals of building a “socialist utopia” and achieving economic development. In pursuit of these goals, the Korean Workers’ Party (KWP) has adopted a collectivist developmental strategy that places a premium on collective efforts and non-material incentives. Several problems arose in the process of implementation, and particularly serious were the challenges of de-Stalinism from outside and dogmatism from within as well as individualism among the public. The KWP responded with political projects: to solidify the Party and strengthen its unity with the public while privileging ideological incentives over material rewards. The series of choices has led to the establishment of the Suryong system where Kim Il-Sung occupies the central position of power around which the Party and mass are organized. While the Suryong system faced particularly difficult challenges in the 1990s, Kim Jong-Il’s ‘Military-First Policies’ sought to institutionalize the system further by using the military to diffuse Suryong system’s normative values throughout the society. This paper concludes by considering some of the negative consequences that the pursuit of such a strategy has brought about. About the Author Young Chul Chung is currently a Research Fellow at Graduate School of International Studies, Seoul National University. He received a Ph.D. in Sociology from Seoul National University and has published a number of books and articles on North Korea, including Towards a Unified Korea in the 21st Century (Seoul: Seoul National University press, 2005), North Korea’s Reform and Opening (Seoul: Sunin, 2004), “Is North Korea Moving Toward a Market Economy?” and “North Korean Reform and Open: Dual Strategy and Silli (Practical) Socialism.” Contact Information Young Chul Chung, Graduate School of International Studies, Seoul National University, 140-1 San 56-1, Sillim-Dong, Gwanak-gu, Seoul, 151-742, Korea, Tel: 02-880-8501, Fax: 02-879-1496, Email: [email protected] 1. Introduction In the conclusion of an article published in 1963, Glenn D. Paige argued that the “Communist politics in North Korea have been characterized by a degree of harshness which it is difficult for an outside(r) to understand…”1 Over forty years have passed since then and North Korea still remains a nation of mystery to outsiders. And whether then or now, it is difficult to find any qualitative improvements, if there have been one made, in the expressions that describe North Korea. Totalitarianism, satellite state and absolutist state etc… Today North Korea is referred to as the last remaining Stalinist regime on the face of the earth: One party dictatorship, one ideology, fanatic loyalty to the leader and various apparatuses that insinuate into all aspects of the society. These features are comparable to those of Stalinist Soviet Union. All these apparent traits qualify Friedrich and Brzezinski’s description of ‘totalitarianism’. However, is it possible to make classification of North Korea based on its skeletons? As Alex Inkeles pointed out, the evaluation of a model is not whether the social model is right or wrong, but how rich or poor it is.2 If one pays heed to this argument, the totalitarian model only provides a partial explanation of North Korean society. And these features that have been understood as totalitarian can be commonly found in any number of societies. Furthermore, such can be seen more often in nations that are described as authoritarian.3 Since the 1950’s and the periods following détente, civil rights and other new social movements in US, the totalitarian model has come under heavy attacks. However, with the revival of the Cold War during the Reagan-Thatcher era, the model was newly resurrected and merged with political and ideological purposes to evidently become further expanded and reproduced upon.4 And today, North Korea exists as a testament to the revitalized theory of totalitarianism. As Kongdan Oh has simplistically and yet, compellingly drawn, the image of North Korea is that of Kim’s Dynasty agreed upon by the union of totalitarianism and Confucianism.5 Additionally, as it is revealing in the title of Adrian Buzo’s book, North Korea is merely a dynastic model of an Asiatic totalitarianism.6 In fact, the only one who has 1 Paige, Glenn D. & Lee, Dong Jun, 'The Post-War Politics of Communist Korea,' The China Quarterly No. 14 (April June, 1963), p. 28. 2 Inkeles, Alex, 'Models and Issues in the analysis of Soviet,' Survey 60 (July, 1966), p. 3. 3 Fridriech and Brzezinski cites six features as being particular to totalitarianism: Official ideology, single man’s party, system of terror by police control, monopoly on communications system, state directed economy. Friedrich, Carl J. and Brzezinski, Zbigniew K., Totalitarian Dictatorship & Autocracy (New York: Praeger, 1956), p. 31. However, such characteristics can be seen to differing degrees in all nation-states. In particular, the monopoly on weapons is commonly found in most nations and in regards to the ideology and the one-party system, this is also evident in authoritarian states as well. And as for the state directed economy, this is commonly prevalent in all socialist states. 4 As for the history of totalitarianism see, Gleason, Abbott, Totalitarianism: The Inner History of the Cold War (New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995), Ch. 7. 5 Take a look at Kongdan Oh’s work. She predetermines North Korea as a dynasty that has been forged by totalitarianism and Confucianism. Oh, Kongdan and Hassig, Ralph C., North Korea through the looking glass(Washington D.C: Brookings, 2002). 6 Buzo, Adrian, The Guerilla Dynasty (Boulder Colo.: Westview Press, 1999). 1 applied more social scientific understanding of totalitarianism to North Korea, so far is McCormack. He describes North Korea as a neo-totalitarian state and even then, views North Korea as having deviated from the classical model of totalitarian state.7 As Edward Said has pointed out, the Orientalism of the West is verily evident in its taxonomical exercise. Orientalistic views and analysis are applied not only towards the Orient of the West, but also towards all Others that are at its opposite. The most critical problem of the Orientalistic view is in its refusal to recognize the cultural parity (cultural relativism) of others or in its dismissal of the history and the values of Other. Such perception leads to the reproduction of knowledge in a fixed framework and the knowledge reproduced within reinforces the existing perception, thus creating a cycle of entrenchment. Today in the West, particularly the perception of North Korea within the American academia is almost Orientalistic.8 To be more precise, it can be called ‘North Korean-ism’. Before ‘North Korean-ism’ can be validated as a theory, it must first be tested with historical and structural analysis of the present situation in North Korea. This article is divided into two parts. The first will provide an overview of the critical works on the Suryong system of North Korea in the Western academia and highlight the problems associated with each approach. And the second will examine the North Korean Suryong system through the use of ‘developmental strategic’ methodology. Through the ‘developmental strategic’ analysis, the article will demonstrate how the Suryong system was formed during the process of implementing a collectivistic developmental strategy while carrying on the struggles against individualism and revisionism. 2. The evaluation of North Korea’s Suryong political system in the West 1) North Korea Studies in the US: The entrapment of the Cold War The view of North Korea within the Western academia, accumulated over the past fifty years, has still yet to be freed of the constraints of the Cold War. The reason for this lies in North Korea never having invited much scholarly interests, but the other comes from the academia still being hampered by the restraints of the Cold-War ideologies. Starting in the mid and the late 1980’s, the increased interest on North Korea has brought according output of works and yet, neither the boundaries of scholarly interests nor the quality of works have improved much. In fact, the narrow scope of researches that are more often concentrated on the nuclear missiles issues of the 1990’s and the policy-directed researches have led to a decrease in the analyses of the history, the structure and the present situation of North Korea. This has led to policy formulation on North Korea that is want for accurate knowledge and reveals the biases and the paucity of critical examination based on few select information. When summarized, North Korean studies carried out so far is as follows: 7 McCormack, Gavan, 'Kim's Country: Hard Times in North Korea,' New Left Review, No. 198, March/April 1993. 8 Such perception of the ‘problem’ that is North Korea is quite clearly shown in the problematization of North Korea. That is, the solution to the ‘problem’ (with North Korea) is not sought from the causes itself, but it is deduced from the very existence of North Korea.

Load more